|
|
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) |
| Line 8: |
Line 8: |
| | {{Custom TabContent Trainee Open}} | | {{Custom TabContent Trainee Open}} |
| | {{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainee}} | | {{Instruction Steps Foldout Trainee}} |
| − | {{Instruction Perspective Trainee | + | {{Instruction Perspective Trainee}} |
| − | |Is About=Effective RE/RI training benefits from active learning, reflective practices, experiential learning, and ongoing feedback (Löfström & Tammeleht, 2023 citing: Bagdasarov et al., 2012; Johnson et al., 2012; Quintana et al. 2004; Reiser, 2004; Tammeleht et al., 2021). These methods and approaches described in this module are compatible with the training materials and resources produced within the selected EU-funded projects and presented in the BEYOND trainer guide. Indeed, many of the activities described in the project materials draw on a case-based approach, scaffolding and collaborative learning. To underpin the use of these methods and approaches, this guide provides an overview of why and how they support RE/RI learning, so that trainers may make their teaching choice based on research evidence.
| |
| − | }}
| |
| − | {{Instruction Step Trainee
| |
| − | |Instruction Step Title=Learn about the case based approach
| |
| − | |Instruction Step Text=Across disciplines, case-based learning (CBL) is a well-established method that encourages higher levels of cognition by having students apply their knowledge to real-world or fictional situations (see Bloom's Taxonomy or Relational/extended abstract levels of learning in SOLO taxonomy).
| |
| − | | |
| − | Learners usually '''work in groups''' on case studies, which are narratives with one or more characters and/or scenarios. The cases pose a disciplinary issue or issues, to which learners come up with remedies while working with an instructor (Case-Based Learning, 2024; Löfström & Tammeleht, 2023; Tammeleht et al., 2019). Case studies are an effective teaching tool that engages learners, stimulates critical thinking, and enables a deeper understanding of real-life situations. The use of case studies is a deliberate process designed to promote active engagement, critical thinking, and deeper understanding among students. Prior research (e.g., Löfström & Tammeleht, 2023 citing: Bagdasarov et al., 2012; Johnson et al., 2012; McWilliams & Nahavandi, 2006; Nonis & Swift, 2001; O'Leary & Cotter, 2000) has identified the use of cases to be beneficial in RE/RI teaching/learning. Understanding why and how learning occurs is essential for improving teaching, and as a result, understanding how learners learn can be accessed through an awareness of learning within the framework of research ethics and integrity (Löfström & Tammeleht, 2023).
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''It begins with the careful selection''' of relevant case studies that align with the learning objectives of the course. These cases should not only be current and authentic but should also reflect the students' interests and experiences and provide them with a tangible connection to the course material. RE/RI case-studies can be easily found on [[Main Page|the Embassy of Good Science]].
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''Once a suitable case study has been selected''', the teaching process usually begins with an introduction to the case (e.g., providing context and background information. This first step is crucial to ensuring that students understand the importance of the case study and its relevance to the wider course material. This practice will help students to get acquainted with the topic. In addition to case-studies, also vignettes have been used in RE/RI education to reflect on real-life situations including an explicit or implicit conflict. Trainers may identify a specific ethical/integrity issue on which learners are asked to reflect on (Löfström & Tammeleht, 2023).
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''As learners delve into the case study''', they are asked to actively engage with the material. This means more than just passive reading; learners are encouraged to take notes, ask questions, and identify important themes or patterns contained in the case study. By promoting active reading practises, instructors aim to encourage the development of deeper understanding of the complexity of real-world problems and the various factors at play.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''The initial reading''' is often followed by common discussion and analysis. With the guidance of the trainer, learners are encouraged to share their interpretations of the case study and explore different perspectives. Discussions can be structured around questions, which encourage critical thinking, consider alternative viewpoints and evaluate the implications of different approaches in order to move from uni- and multistructural levels to relational and extended abstract levels.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Central to the case study approach is the opportunity for learners to '''apply theoretical concepts and principles to real-life situations'''. Instructors help learners make connections between the case study and the course material by encouraging them to analyse the case through the lens of relevant theories, models or frameworks. This process not only deepens students' understanding of theoretical concepts, but also enhances their ability to apply these concepts in practical contexts.
| |
| − | | |
| − | In addition, case studies provide a platform to foster problem-solving skills. Learners are tasked with finding creative solutions to the challenges presented in the case, evaluating the feasibility of various options, and developing a reasoned plan of action. Through this process, learners learn to deal with complex problems, weigh competing interests, and make informed decisions based on facts and analyses.
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''Finally''', case studies can serve as a valuable assessment tool, allowing instructors to evaluate learners' mastery of the content of the course and their ability to apply theoretical concepts to real-world scenarios. Assignments may include written reflections, group presentations, or class discussions based on the case study so that students can demonstrate their learning and receive constructive feedback from fellow students and instructors.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Case-based approaches are utilised in ENERI, RID-SSISS, Path2Integrity, INTEGRITY and VIRT<sup>2</sup>UE.
| |
| − | }}
| |
| − | {{Instruction Step Trainee
| |
| − | |Instruction Step Title=Learn about collaborative learning
| |
| − | |Instruction Step Text=Collaborative learning is a pedagogical approach that emphasises active '''participation''', '''shared responsibility''' and '''mutual support''' among students. Collaborative learning is based on the idea that the production and internalization of the knowledge is established by collaboration. Moreover, learning is usually best supported through social negotiation rarther than competition. Furthermore, team learning has been demonstrated to significantly enhance ethical practice. Research indicates that students primarily interpret their socialisation into academia and their field by the ethical standards and practices that they observe (Löfström &Tammeleht, 2023; Tammeleht et al., 2022; Tammeleht et al., 2019).
| |
| − | | |
| − | When teaching research ethics and integrity, collaborative learning can be particularly effective as it can promote '''deeper understanding, critical thinking and ethical reasoning skills'''. In collaborative learning environments, students are actively engaged in the learning process rather than passively receiving information. They participate in '''discussions''', '''debates''' and '''hands-on activities''' that require them to grapple with ethical dilemmas, analyse complex issues and apply ethical principles to real-world scenarios. This active engagement promotes deeper learning and retention of ethical concepts and principles. Collaborative learning encourages students to critically evaluate information, perspectives and arguments related to research ethics and integrity. Through discussions with peers, analysing case studies and reflecting on their own ethical beliefs and values, learners develop the ability to identify ethical issues, consider alternative viewpoints and make informed decisions (Löfström &Tammeleht, 2023; Tammeleht et al., 2022; Tammeleht et al., 2019).
| |
| − | | |
| − | Collaborative learning environments provide opportunities for learners to '''challenge assumptions, explore ethical complexity and develop reasoned arguments''' based on evidence and ethical principles. Peer interaction is a central component of collaborative learning that allows learners to learn from each other's experiences, perspectives, and insights. By participating in discussions, debates, and collaborative projects with their peers, learners learn about various viewpoints, cultural perspectives, and disciplinary approaches to research ethics and integrity. Peer interaction also fosters collaboration, communication skills and teamwork, which are essential for addressing ethical challenges in research environments where collaboration and interdisciplinary cooperation are increasingly common (Löfström & Tammeleht, 2023; Tammeleht et al., 2022; Tammeleht et al., 2019).
| |
| − | | |
| − | '''During collaborating trainings, a variety of teaching methods can be used'''. Prior research has addressed collaborative learning with the use of case-based approaches, storytelling, flipped classroom, and role play and games (e.g., [https://www.erim.eur.nl/research-integrity/training-and-education/dilemma-game/ Rotterdam dilemma game]) (Koterwas et al., 2021; Löfström, 2016; Tammeleht et al., 2019; Tammeleht et al., 2022).
| |
| − | | |
| − | Collaborative approaches are utilised in Path2Integrity, INTEGRITY and VIRT<sup>2</sup>UE.
| |
| − | }}
| |
| − | {{Instruction Step Trainee
| |
| − | |Instruction Step Title=Learn about scaffolding and feedback
| |
| − | |Instruction Step Text=[https://www.structural-learning.com/post/scaffolding-in-education-a-teachers-guide Scaffolding] is a teaching technique, which involves providing tailored support to learners based on their current expertise and gradually withdrawing support as they become more proficient. This approach, researched in the context of research ethics and integrity, is used in both face-to-face and online learning environments, including problem-based and inquiry learning (Quintana et al. 2004; Reiser, 2004; Tammeleht et al., 2021). Conceptual scaffolding is crucial in problem-based and inquiry learning, helping learners navigate complex concepts and considering various learning styles. Teachers can adjust academic content to suit learners' abilities. Online courses benefit from personalized learning paths that can be adjusted in real-time. Scaffolding aligns with the idea of [https://www.structural-learning.com/post/vygotskys-theory Vygotsky's zone of proximal development], that is instruction and facilitation should target the domain where the learner can function with assistance. It is unnecessary to provide scaffolding in domains which the learner already masters, or which are still beyond the learners reach.
| |
| − | | |
| − | When teaching research ethics and integrity, scaffolding entails dissecting difficult ideas into smaller, more digestible chunks and supporting students as they gain knowledge. [https://www.buffalo.edu/catt/teach/develop/build/scaffolding.html#:~:text=Scaffolding%20is%20an%20instructional%20practice,%2C%20processes%2C%20and%20learning%20strategies Scaffolding] can be planned into the design of the course teaching/learning activities and the instructions of these, but often opportunities to incorporate scaffolding techniques present themselves ad hoc. In this case, it is important that the trainer is aware of a variety of techniques and recognises situations in which they can be beneficially used to support learning. The steps for incorporating scaffolding include:
| |
| − | | |
| − | 1. Identifying what the learner already knows, that is, what is their current level and where is the zone of proximal development;
| |
| − | | |
| − | 2. Setting goals, which reflect the learning objectives, for the learner in line with what was determined to be within reach in the prior step;
| |
| − | | |
| − | 3. Planning a suitable breakdown of goals and activities in support of the goals;
| |
| − | | |
| − | 4. Carrying out the training with scaffolding, monitoring of learning and provision of feedback during the learning;
| |
| − | | |
| − | 5. Adjusting the support and gradually decreasing it as the learner progresses towards the goal;
| |
| − | | |
| − | 6. new goals and planning activities as the prior goals are reached.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | For example the wibsite Scaffolding Over Time ( https://www.buffalo.edu/catt.html prepared by the Office of Curriculum [https://www.buffalo.edu/catt.html and Teaching Transformation,] University of Buffalo provides more information on Scaffolding for the trainer interested in using this technique.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | Table 3 presents a scaffolding framework utilised in research ethics training (Tammeleht et al., 2020).
| |
| − | {{{!}} class="wikitable"
| |
| − | {{!}}'''Scaffolding process'''
| |
| − | {{!}}'''Scaffolding mechanism'''
| |
| − | {{!}}'''Scaffolding technique'''
| |
| − | {{!}}'''Scaffolding purpose'''
| |
| − | {{!}}'''Illustrative example'''
| |
| − | {{!}}-
| |
| − | {{!}} rowspan="6" {{!}}SENSE MAKIMG
| |
| − | {{!}}Problematizing
| |
| − | {{!}}Hinting
| |
| − | {{!}}Give an indirect suggestion or piece of evidence that leads toward a problem solution (Merriam-Webster)
| |
| − | {{!}}‘So, the documents pertaining to research ethics and integrity to consult would be…’ (implying that some documents should be consulted)
| |
| − | {{!}}-
| |
| − | {{!}}Problematizing
| |
| − | {{!}}Describing the problem to direct focus
| |
| − | {{!}}Orient to the important features (Tambaum, 2017)
| |
| − | {{!}}‘Indeed, when you have to get an informed consent you should consider various aspects, for example …’
| |
| − | {{!}}-
| |
| − | {{!}}Structural'''/''' Problematizing
| |
| − | {{!}}Making fill-in-the-blank kinds of requests
| |
| − | {{!}}A statement or a question with a missing component (but some info is given)
| |
| − | {{!}}‘A good way to highlight the importance of research integrity would be to ….?’
| |
| − | {{!}}-
| |
| − | {{!}}Structural'''/''' Problematizing
| |
| − | {{!}}Asking a leading question (P – why?)
| |
| − | {{!}}A question that prompts or encourages the answer wanted
| |
| − | {{!}}‘Where can you find the information pertaining to the codes of conduct?’
| |
| − | {{!}}-
| |
| − | {{!}}Structural
| |
| − | {{!}}Providing an example
| |
| − | {{!}}Giving an example to illustrate a point
| |
| − | {{!}}‘For example, in Europe it is a common practice to consult a research integrity advisor.’
| |
| − | {{!}}-
| |
| − | {{!}}Structural
| |
| − | {{!}}Providing physical props
| |
| − | {{!}}Helping to understand by mimicking or showing a visual aid
| |
| − | {{!}}‘What do you think are the ethical aspects of designing this item?’ (show e.g. a fork)
| |
| − | {{!}}-
| |
| − | {{!}} rowspan="6" {{!}}PROCESS MANAGEMENT
| |
| − | {{!}}Structural
| |
| − | {{!}}Pumping
| |
| − | {{!}}Simulating to go further without specific instructions (Tambaum, 2017)
| |
| − | {{!}}‘OK, what else?’
| |
| − | {{!}}-
| |
| − | {{!}}Structural
| |
| − | {{!}}Redirecting the learner
| |
| − | {{!}}Showing which direction to go, which aspect should be tackled next (especially when seeing that the direction is lost/off)
| |
| − | {{!}}‘All right, let’s get back to the track and discuss the next steps of the ethics review process’
| |
| − | {{!}}-
| |
| − | {{!}}Structural
| |
| − | {{!}}Decomposing the task
| |
| − | {{!}}Making the bigger task into smaller components
| |
| − | {{!}}‘First, think what you know about the ethics review process, then, read the paragraph and finally…’ (give instructions one task after another)
| |
| − | {{!}}-
| |
| − | {{!}}Structural
| |
| − | {{!}}Initiating the reasoning step
| |
| − | {{!}}Use the faculty of reason so as to arrive at conclusions
| |
| − | {{!}}‘What happened first was …, and then you …, what do you think should happen next to solve this dilemma?’
| |
| − | {{!}}-
| |
| − | {{!}}Structural
| |
| − | {{!}}Completing the learners’ reasoning
| |
| − | {{!}}‘Splicing in’ the correct answer (Tambaum, 2017)
| |
| − | {{!}}(the learner cannot end the thought) ‘... you mean a code of conduct should be consulted?’
| |
| − | {{!}}-
| |
| − | {{!}}Structural
| |
| − | {{!}}Executing parts of the skill
| |
| − | {{!}}Do parts of the task for the learner to give an example
| |
| − | {{!}}‘OK, so first you consult the ALLEA code of conduct and then …’
| |
| − | {{!}}-
| |
| − | {{!}} rowspan="3" {{!}}ARTICULATION & REFLECTION
| |
| − | {{!}}Structural
| |
| − | {{!}}Maintaining goal orientation
| |
| − | {{!}}Reminding the learner of some aspect of the task
| |
| − | {{!}}‘Have you also had time to think about …?’
| |
| − | {{!}}-
| |
| − | {{!}}Structural'''/''' Problematizing
| |
| − | {{!}}Highlighting critical features
| |
| − | {{!}}Drawing attention to the most important aspects of the problem; highlighting ‘discrepancies’ (Reiser, 2004)
| |
| − | {{!}}‘Do you remember you mentioned the ethics review, what other purposes might it have?’
| |
| − | {{!}}-
| |
| − | {{!}}Problematizing
| |
| − | {{!}}Comparing the current problem with a previously solved one
| |
| − | {{!}}Showing similarities between solutions
| |
| − | {{!}}‘Do you recall the situation that happened to Dr Smith when he invited participants into his survey? This situation may actually have similar implications.’
| |
| − | {{!}}}
| |
| − | Table 3: Scaffolding framework utilised in research ethics training.
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | Offering '''feedback''' and facilitating reflection are critical components when using scaffolding in research ethics and integrity training.
| |
| − | | |
| − | Feedback is more effectives (Brinko, 1993):
| |
| − | | |
| − | - when given as soon as possible after the session,
| |
| − | | |
| − | - when it is focused,
| |
| − | | |
| − | - when considered as a process, not a one-time shot,
| |
| − | | |
| − | - when receivers participate in the feedback process freely or when doing so is required by regular professional standards,
| |
| − | | |
| − | - when it has a restricted and chosen number of negative comments mixed in with a decent number of positive and encouraging remarks.
| |
| − | | |
| − | - when negative information is "sandwiched" between positive information,
| |
| − | | |
| − | - when it allows the receiver to respond and interact,
| |
| − | | |
| − | - when given frequently, but not excessively,
| |
| − | | |
| − | - when it creates cognitive [https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/cognitive-dissonance dissonance] (Van Lange et al., 2012),
| |
| − | | |
| − | | |
| − | Feedback can be provided by the trainer as well as by '''peers'''. Peer feedback is effective (Brinko, 1993):
| |
| − | | |
| − | - when information is gathered from different people,
| |
| − | | |
| − | - when it is believed that the information's source is reliable, informed, and has a good intention,
| |
| − | | |
| − | - when the status or career level of the feedback provider and its’ recipient are the same
| |
| − | | |
| − | Scaffolding techniques are utilised in RID-SSISS, ROSiE, VIRT2UE, INTEGRITY, Path2Integrity, and in the Case studies section of ENERI Classroom.
| |
| − | }} | |
| | {{Instruction Remarks Trainee}} | | {{Instruction Remarks Trainee}} |
| | {{Custom TabContent Close Trainee}} | | {{Custom TabContent Close Trainee}} |
| Line 222: |
Line 42: |
| | {{Related To | | {{Related To |
| | |Related To Resource=Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70; Resource:45a04c31-5a75-4816-8484-2dd9b71d1674; Resource:Aef6b98d-9cc5-4db0-bffd-4a3daa99a3f3; Resource:C99f17ec-3d1e-4f7a-bfc7-3e3607934ead; Resource:F6100097-fddb-4c77-9098-1bc767c34a6a; Resource:7f7810d8-74a2-42ac-906c-7f6a73fcd183; Resource:E99e20d0-8116-4d77-84ec-7df396703bf4; Resource:67caae86-68db-49ea-8305-2010fe701aa6 | | |Related To Resource=Resource:1d26fd13-1ced-44bc-8d19-e094b37f8f70; Resource:45a04c31-5a75-4816-8484-2dd9b71d1674; Resource:Aef6b98d-9cc5-4db0-bffd-4a3daa99a3f3; Resource:C99f17ec-3d1e-4f7a-bfc7-3e3607934ead; Resource:F6100097-fddb-4c77-9098-1bc767c34a6a; Resource:7f7810d8-74a2-42ac-906c-7f6a73fcd183; Resource:E99e20d0-8116-4d77-84ec-7df396703bf4; Resource:67caae86-68db-49ea-8305-2010fe701aa6 |
| | + | |Related To Instruction=Instruction:1c5bdda7-6444-497b-aaf2-53852a0fd8ee; Instruction:4afd5ea7-0308-4e80-9dfc-6b66daf2ac81; Instruction:Eeee007a-14ec-4ffa-b62e-514aafe4bd1a; Instruction:204c2375-0867-4302-845f-cdc99e3d38bc; Instruction:44eb9553-4c0a-40c9-9ed1-50b4f591e3fb; Instruction:30f33e85-09ed-4ea7-9ac2-7fb26d27ae55; Instruction:02a025d1-fb65-40b4-914f-5efed84ee112 |
| | }} | | }} |
| | {{Tags}} | | {{Tags}} |
Instructions
